Page 35 – Key Publishing

SlowMan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 511 through 525 (of 572 total)

← 1 2 3 … 34 35 36 37 38 39 →

Author

Posts
October 21, 2012 at 11:21 pm in reply to: stealth fighter and BVR missile #2292705

SlowMan
Participant

Well, the future of BVR missile is the BVR IR missile, because there is no stealth against heat emissions; and jets do heat up a lot during a combat flight.

October 21, 2012 at 11:17 pm in reply to: Mitsubishi F-3 project to launch in 2016, enter production in 2027 #2292712

SlowMan
Participant

I suggest subcontracting to OEM’s of friendly countries where they have the know how needed to do the job and you do not.

You do not seem to understand that there is little that Japan can’t build in country.

As the name “F-3” suggests, this is the 3rd fighter jet Japan is building. In other word, this is not the first time and they do know how to build fighter jets, and Japan was notorious for the domestication of licensed jets in the past.

Without the UK buying the F-3, the British contractors will have to compete for the little bits of parts that Japan can’t do or is uncompetitive if built in house, like the ejection seat. But don’t expect anything of a significant value, those are only reserved for the countries that are actually buying the F-3. A country that buys 20% of F-3’s output should get 20% of total contracts, it’s that simple.

October 21, 2012 at 5:35 pm in reply to: Mitsubishi F-3 project to launch in 2016, enter production in 2027 #2292830

SlowMan
Participant

I guess there are a number of areas in which BaE Systems technological know how surpasses Mitsubishi’s.

That doesn’t matter. Only the contractors of the buying countries will be getting the contracts. As long as a work can be done by a contractor of buying nations, that contractor gets the job.

if no US company is involved, I think the US would be more likely to buy F-3 if BaE Systems rather than EADS were involved.

If US buys, then it will be a joint project and the US contractors will be involved 100%.

Would the USA government be interested in such an arrangement for a project it does not control?

The US did this before; the SM-3 missile. The US was furious that Japan would not grant export license for the land-based Missile Defense system to third party countries citing its arms export ban policy, which has been lifted last year.

October 21, 2012 at 2:41 pm in reply to: Mitsubishi F-3 project to launch in 2016, enter production in 2027 #2292867

SlowMan
Participant

No chance of a deal on a company-to-company basis?

There is little that Japan would need from UK. Historically, UK’s scope of work was the engine, but the engine is Japanese-developed in this case.

If you want work, then you must buy.

UK participation in F-35 is not dependent on UK ordering F-35.

It is no accident that the UK participation is in F-35B, which the UK was originally planning to buy in 130 units and had the Harrier expertise to bring in.

October 21, 2012 at 4:47 am in reply to: Mitsubishi F-3 project to launch in 2016, enter production in 2027 #2292941

SlowMan
Participant

The only country in Europe I wouldn’t doubt to join is the UK.

No European partner nation for one simple reason; no one in Europe has the money to buy it with the current ongoing European financial crisis.

Rmember, the work is split among purchasing nations only. No money on the table, no work share.

BAE Systems and the British Government are seeming to be looking at Japan for a number of joint military ventures, this could possibly be one of them they have in mind. A compelling replacement for the Typhoon too perhaps.

No Typhoon replacement for another 30 years.

October 20, 2012 at 4:42 pm in reply to: Mitsubishi F-3 project to launch in 2016, enter production in 2027 #2293193

SlowMan
Participant

The Japanese would have to prove that they can go it alone if necessary.

That will not be a problem.

It’s not the technology that Japan’s having a problem with, but the economy of development and production. Let’s be honest, Japanese government debt is at 240% of GDP and they too have to start the austerity soon.

This is why Japan needs a partner nation or two to pool the funding, and only the US, Canada, and Australia have the necessary financial resources to join in the program, co-fund and co-purchases.

October 20, 2012 at 3:22 pm in reply to: Mitsubishi F-3 project to launch in 2016, enter production in 2027 #2293261

SlowMan
Participant

With a project of this magnitude would it not make sense to team up with a US manufacturer

Not US manufacturers, but the US government. What Japan needs is a foreign government that will buy the jets to reduce the average unit cost. Stuff like work and technology share comes into the picture only after that.

If the US is reluctant to sell them the Raptor today, what makes the Japs belive they will be offered to buy its replacer in the future?

The US defense budget cut. Look at T-X, the Pentagon is shopping foreign airframes off the shelf because it cannot finance the development of an all new airframe.

Besides i doubt they will have much to offer the amerricans in any 6G joint venture..

– 100 watt GaN AESA element
– Smart Skin radar.

October 19, 2012 at 8:44 pm in reply to: what's the Tejas' fundamental problem? #2296126

SlowMan
Participant

another new report in IAF thread, another new problem.

what’s the fundamental problem with this jet?

The developer had no prior fast jet developing experience, and India lacks the industrial sophistication to supply parts for it.

HAL should have had a foreign tech consultant to help them out, because the foreign tech consultant could spot problems that HAL couldn’t.

October 19, 2012 at 4:48 pm in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2296245

SlowMan
Participant

Well if KFX (1st Picture) has not materialized, then the single seat F-50 (2nd pict) can take over the program.

The KFX will go ahead, the winning participant will be announced next month according to the latest DAPA announcement.

Korea simply doesn’t have the option as they must to replace 200 jets and the idea of buying and operating 200 F-35s is simply a non-starter.

October 19, 2012 at 4:44 pm in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2296253

SlowMan
Participant

If BAE Systems is serious about the UAV program and the USAF trainer program then I think they should expand on the idea and configure the UAV and Super Hawk to be adaptable to EJ200, M-88 or GE F404/414 derivatives.

M-88 : 700 mm diameter
EJ-200 : 800 mm diameter
F414 : 900 mm diameter

October 19, 2012 at 4:54 am in reply to: F-35 News thread. Part Deux #2296472

SlowMan
Participant

btw, The F-35 has gone through ingestion testing.

Pointless in Canada’s case because of the vast territory covered by fighter jets. A single engine jet’s bird strike = crash = $150 million jet lost.

No fighter jet priced above $40 million should have single engine.

October 19, 2012 at 4:13 am in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2296477

SlowMan
Participant

P.S. I wouldn’t spend too much time on someone who pitches the Flanker as a lightweight or inexpensive aircraft, lol.

Lightweight, no.
Inexpensive, yes.

Malaysia bought Su-30MKM for $41 million each. That’s way less than even a new-build F-16.

October 19, 2012 at 3:23 am in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2296514

SlowMan
Participant

Heck the money goes to LM anyway, why do they care if people buy F16s or F35s?

F-35 = Lockheed.
Boeing T-X based light fighter = Boeing.

As for the T-50 based light fighter for export, Lockheed doesn’t have the rights for that as all rights to T-50 outside of the US market belongs to the Korean government and Lockheed gets the exclusive US rights with a varying work sharing ratio agreement between two. But fear not, the Korean government is not interested in doing an F-50 as they have no use for one.

Not necessarily. The countries I have in mind for such a lightweight fighter are those who cannot afford F-35 or don’t want to spend too much.

The Russians and the Chinese have cornered such 3rd world markets.

Those markets will be gone for the US soon and handed over to Gripen

Actually to Flankers, J-10s, and JF-17s.

The X-32 has already flown so the layout is known.

Not only was the X-32 a single engine jet, it also was powered by the biggest fighter jet engine ever with a whopping 40,000 lbs of dry-thrust necessary for STOVL.(F135 has 25,000 lbs dry thrust by comparison).

When you remove the STOVL requirement, you can optimize it so much that no sane company would choose to base its non STOVL jet on an STOVL airframe.

October 18, 2012 at 5:47 pm in reply to: F-35 vs mig-31BM , new F-18E/F and F-15SE #2296638

SlowMan
Participant

1. You seemed to have missed the first part of the sentence In other words, whomever did the analysis did not have the true RCS

The analysis itself was classified. Its illustration (95% reduction in RCS) is not.

2. “95% improvement” could mean many things, especially considering it is compared to 1st-4th gen.

The comparison was specifically to a 4 th gen jet. The standard RCS of a 4th gen jet used by radar vendors is 5 m2. If the comparison was made to CF-18, then it was 3 m2.

What you are looking at with the F-35(CF-35) is an LO jet with 0.15~0.25 m2 in RCS. This is why the UK defense officials were saying that arming ASRAAM externally for UK F-35 didn’t change the overall RCS much. This is what Boeing’s Silent Eagle/Hornet business model is based on, because Boeing’s Silent series’s business case can’t justify if the export model F-35 was a true stealth jet. And why countries like Japan and Korea are dumping tens of billions of dollars to build their own TRUE stealth jets with RCS less than 0.01 m2, which they really need in order to counter belligerent China unlike NATO JSF partner nations who don’t have an external security threat anymore.

Ohhh, so close. You almost have learned the lesson of providing sources when making absurd claims.

I was under the impression that you knew about this; every F-35 critic does. You surprised me by not knowing this critical piece of information, so I overestimated you.

October 18, 2012 at 5:30 pm in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2296656

SlowMan
Participant

Nice try, but no.

Yes.

Just the facts ma’am, just the facts.

The fact is that the F-35 program is $180 billion over budget and 8 years behind schedule. The reason you never had a weapons program disaster like this before is because the weapons program would be cancelled if it had a fraction of the cost overruns and delays being suffered by the F-35.

An x-32 lite derived design would be pretty neat.

It’s not related to X-32. This is the Boeing’s proposed trainer.

It’s about the size of a T-50, meaning KAI and Lockheed hit the sweetspot 15 years ago.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 511 through 525 (of 572 total)

← 1 2 3 … 34 35 36 37 38 39 →